Questions Frequently Asked About Libertatism

• What do you call one who believes in Libertatism?

• What is the Libertatist conception of God?

• Is it accurate to say that Libertatians worship freedom?

• Is God conscious, according to Libertatism?

• Is God rational, according to Libertatism?

• Is God omnipotent, according to Libertatism?

• Is God omniscient, according to Libertatism?

• Is God male, according to Libertatism?

• Is Earthly life a “testing process” designed by God for humans?

• Does Libertatism have any commandments?

• What, according to Libertatism, is the just punishment for breaking the One Commandment?

• Is Libertatism anti-Christian?

• Does one have to be a Christian to be a Libertatian?

• How does the Church of Liberty look upon agnosticism?

• What is the Libertatist view on marriage?

• What is the Libertatist view on taxation?

• What is the Libertatist view on evolution?

• What is the Libertatist view on war?

• What is the Libertatist view on fideism?

• Why doesn’t God help us?  Why doesn’t God answer my prayers?

• Is the soul immortal, according to Libertatism?

• What is the structure of the Church of Liberty?  Are there priests or other religious figures?

• Does Libertatism have a Holy Book, like the Bible or the Torah?

• Are you affiliated with the Body of Christ in Liberty, Missouri, USA?

• Who designed this site?

What do you call one who believes in Libertatism?

One who believes in Libertatism is described as a Libertatian (not to be confused with a libertarian or a libertine).

What is the Libertatist conception of God?

Libertatians hold that God is the pure manifestation of peace and freedom in our lives.  In a manner of speaking, we believe that God is Liberty.

Is it accurate to say that Libertatians worship freedom?

That depends upon who you ask.  Some Libertatians might summarise their belief by saying that they do worship freedom, whereas others might object, declaring such a statement an over-simplification.  More accurately, Libertatians believe God is Liberty, in the same way that Christians might say that God is love, or LaVeyan Satanists might say that God is pleasure.

Is God conscious, according to Libertatism?

Libertatism does not take a stance on whether or not God is conscious.  It would not be rational of us to presuppose one way or the other.

What we can rationally determine is that if God is conscious and rational, then God would want us to be as free as possible.  Only an irrational God would allow humans to possess free will if He or She wished for humans to be nothing more than His or Her slaves.  If God wanted slaves, He or She could easily create automatons to do His or Her will, thereby bypassing the messy “testing process” of Earthly life.

Further, only an irrational God would give humans a life on Earth prior to Nirvana if He or She did not want humans to use their God-allowed faculty of reason to gain in understanding.  Only an irrational God would want people to believe in Him or Her blindly.  Rational humans desire peace and freedom, and thus a rational God desires the same.

Is God rational, according to Libertatism?

Libertatians believe that if God is conscious, God is likely rational.  We see no reason why an irrational God would exist, for by existing, a God can define what is and is not rational.  What rational humans discover through reason, assuming God is conscious, is what God defines as rational.  Thus, if we find the notion of God throwing all Jews—even those who lead the most moral and ethical of lives—into a pit of fire for nothing more than believing the “wrong religion” to be irrational, then so does God.

Is God omnipotent, according to Libertatism?

God rationally cannot be omnipotent.  Just how much power God possesses, Libertatism does not hold a stance.

It has often been asked by sceptics of God that, if He or She exists, can He or She heat a burrito so hot that not even He or She can eat it?

As any reasonable person can see, the person who says yes maintains that God cannot eat the burrito and is not fully omnipotent, while the person who says no maintains that God cannot heat a burrito hot enough to burn His or Her own mouth and is not fully omnipotent.  Either way, a fully omnipotent God cannot rationally exist.  But this thought experiment does not disprove the existence of God, merely the existence of full omnipotence.

Libertatism does not take a stand on just how much power God possesses, if any, as it would not be rational of us to presuppose one way or the other.

Is God omniscient, according to Libertatism?

Libertatism does not take a stance on whether or not God is conscious.  It would not be rational of us to presuppose one way or the other.

Is God male, according to Libertatism?

Libertatism does not hold that God necessarily possesses a gender, nor does Libertatism hold that—if God does possess a gender—It is necessarily either male or female.

Nevertheless, many Libertatians prefer to refer to God with the objective form of the feminine pronoun because the term “Liberty” is a feminine term in French, la Liberté.  Still, there is no objective Libertatist rule regarding how one ought to refer to God.  The Church of Liberty leaves it up to each individual to choose in what manner he or she wishes to address God.

Is Earthly life a “testing process” designed by God for humans?

Libertatism does not take a stance on whether or not Earthly life is a test for humans designed by God to determine who is fit for Nirvana or not.  It would not be rational of us to presuppose one way or the other.

What we can rationally determine is that if Earthly life is a testing process designed by God, then God must be conscious.  An unconscious God cannot design.

We can also rationally determine that if Earthly life is a testing process of any sort, it is a test to determine who acts in life most rationally, for a rational God would certainly favour rational humans over irrational humans, if God is to start favouring at all.  Only an irrational God would favour irrational behaviour and those maintaining irrational beliefs.

It is more rational to abide by the One Commandment of Libertatism than not to.

Does Libertatism have any commandments?

Libertatism has only one commandment:

Thou shalt not aggress or advocate aggression against the person or just property of anyone else.

Aggression is not simply the use of force against another or the just property of another, but is more specifically the initiation of force against another or the just property of another.

Effectively, this means that one may only ever use force defensively.  If a person or group of persons acts aggressively against, say, your family, you have the right to use force against the aggressor to defend your family from the aggressor.  However, you do not have the right to initiate force against anyone else in the process, not even against the family of the aggressor.

Property can only be justly acquired in three ways.  1) It can be homesteaded; that is, appropriated from the state of nature through one’s labour.  2) It can be purchased from a previous just owner through a voluntary exchange.  3) It can be given to one by its previous just owner as a gift.

What, according to Libertatism, is the just punishment for breaking the One Commandment?

The Church of Liberty believes that it is just for victims to seek two eyes for an eye, and two teeth for a tooth.

Libertatism adopts this view from libertarian philosopher Walter Block, who argues that if one steals ten dollars from another, the thief ought to lose his right to ten of his own dollars, in addition to the ten dollars he or she stole.  If the aggressor simply has to return the original ten dollars, he or she is in no manifest way actually punished for his or her crime; but if he or she is compelled to pay his or her victim twenty dollars, then he or she is punished insofar as he or she infringed upon the rights of his or her victim.  The aggressor is also obligated to pay for whatever policing or court costs are incurred, as there is no just reason that any innocent person should be compelled to pay as said innocent person committed no crime.

Is Libertatism anti-Christian?

Libertatism is by no means anti-Christian.

When Christianity is followed consistently, it requires anarcho-pascifism, a la Leo Tolstoy or Robert LeFevre.  After all, if one always “turn[s] the other cheek,” one can hardly condone the violent expropriations by the state, or any use violence for any purpose whatsoever.

One who never uses violence or force for any purpose thus necessarily abides by the One Commandment of Libertatism.  Ergo, one who follows Christianity consistently already in fact adheres to Libertatism’s moral code.

Does one have to be a Christian to be a Libertatian?

One certainly does not have to be a Christian to be a Libertatian.  Whereas Christianity dictates that man may never use force for any purpose and must “turn the other cheek,” Libertatism leaves the question of whether or not to use defensive force up to the individual.  The Church of Liberty advocates that each person decide whether the use of defensive force is rational or not in his or her own given situation, and does not presuppose that the use of defensive force is either a moral obligation or a sin.  Those person who opt to use defensive force are, thereby, rejecting Christianity; however, such a person is not thereby also rejecting Libertatism, unless he or she is also employing non-defensive force, also known as aggression.

How does the Church of Liberty look upon agnosticism?

The Church of Liberty does not find agnosticism to be irrational.

What is the Libertatist view on marriage?

The Church of Liberty holds that marriage is a very personal relationship between two or more persons.  When any person employs or threatens to employ aggression to prevent others from consensually joining in, that person is breaking the One Commandment of Libertatism and, thus, sinning.

It therefore stands to reason that it is a sin to ban gay marriage, or to vote for a ban on gay marriage, or to petition for a ban on gay marriage.  It is likewise a sin to use such force to prevent polygamous marriages.

Because marriage is such a personal thing, nobody can be compelled against his or her will to recognise as existing any union between any two or more persons.  Nobody can be compelled to recognise a homosexual marriage as existing, just as no one can be compelled to recognise a heterosexual union as existing.

Since marriage is a personal union inherently resting on the recognition of those personally involved, there ought to be no impediment to divorce.  All that one needs to do to be officially divorced is to cease recognising as existing the union in which he or she presently is a member.

What is the Libertatist view on taxation?

The Church of Liberty holds that a person has a right to his or her justly-acquired property.  In accordance with the One Commandment, it is a sin for any person or group of persons to appropriate the just property of another without the consent of said other—including persons calling themselves “the government.”

The Libertatist view on taxation is that it is theft.  It is therefore a sin to tax, to vote or petition for a new tax, to vote or petition for higher levels of taxes, or to accept welfare from any source one knows to be stealing (e.g. the state).

The Church of Liberty recommends all tax collectors and politicians to quit their jobs immediately and repent for their crimes by paying restitution to their victims.

What is the Libertatist view on evolution?

The Church of Liberty holds that man evolved from lower life forms.  The Church also holds that the egg came before the chicken.

Liberatism provides no stance on the question of whether (A) God intentionally “created” evolution with the explicit intent to see humanity arise therethrough or (B) simply “allowed it to happen.”  It would not be rational of us to presuppose one way or the other.

What is the Libertatist view on war?

The Church of Liberty holds that war can only be just when it is waged defensively and entails zero collateral damage.  Since war is virtually never waged in this manner, war is virtually always unjust.  Libertatism advocates non-interventionism.  Any action that kills an innocent person without said person’s consent violates the One Commandment, and is therefore a sin.

What is the Libertatist view on fideism?

Libertatism rejects fideism.  The Church of Liberty encourages everyone to employ critical analysis.

This does not mean that man can never make a priori assumptions about anything.  Indeed, life requires man to make a priori assumptions about certain things.  For example, each person has no choice but to make the a priori assumption that he or she is either sane or insane, or that the world around him or her actually exists or does not actually exist.  This a priori assumption must be made because man has no objective means of determining for sure that he actually is sane or insane, or that the world he or she perceives exists or not.  That doesn’t mean that once a person has made his or her a priori assumption that he or she cannot remain sceptical as to whether or not he or she made the correct a priori assumption, all it means is that such an assumption is rationally unavoidable.

Most things in life do not require man to make further a priori assumptions, and where man can forego making assumptions, man ought to employ reason, rather than blind faith, to acquire understanding, hence the Church of Liberty’s rejection of fideism.

Why doesn’t God help us?  Why doesn’t God answer my prayers?

Libertatism is a panendeist religion.  Like other deist faiths, Libertatism “tend[s] to assert that God does not intervene with the affairs of human life and the natural laws of the universe” (Deism, Wikipedia, cited 9 April 2008).  We believe that God is a non-interventionist with regard to our lives.  This does not necessarily mean that God is able or unable to intervene, nor does this necessarily mean that God, if He or She is conscious, is uncompassionate.  It would not be rational of us to presuppose one way or the other.

Some deists would say that God has given or allowed us with all the tools necessary to secure the things we need or want.  Others would not claim this.

Is the soul immortal, according to Libertatism?

Libertatism does not take a stance on whether or not the soul, if it exists, is immortal.  It would not be rational of us to presuppose one way or the other.

What is the structure of the Church of Liberty?  Are there priests or other religious figures?

There are no priests, rabbis, popes, or other such figures in Libertatism.  The religion spreads, not by bashing people over the head with it, but by casual word of mouth.  In keeping with our individualistic tendencies, the Church of Liberty sees no need to ensure that it maintains or promotes organised religion.

Does Libertatism have a Holy Book, like the Bible or the Torah?

The Church of Liberty provides this suggested reading list.  Nevertheless, Libertatism has no religious texts, and not even those texts located on the suggested reading list constitute holy or infallible texts according to this religion.  Libertatism has no religious texts because it advocates that followers use reason to discover the nature of God and the world, rather than the blind faith advocated by fideists.

Are you affiliated with the Body of Christ in Liberty, Missouri, USA?

No.  Sorry if there is some confusion, as their URL is similar to ours.

Who designed this site?

The website you are viewing was designed in 2008 at the behest of the Church of Liberty by the artist Alex Peak.  We would like to thank him for his excellent work.